Posted on 02/02/2003 5:56:41 PM PST by FSPress
Here are some to the same arguments that we hear today about guns. This was a plea that helped establish the Gun Control Act of 1967. Stop and Think. Would you have supported this legislation? The person who spoke the words is today a defender of the second amendment.
TWO WEEKS AGO, ROBERT F. KENNEDY BECAME ONE OF THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS STRUCK DOWN BY AN ASSASSIN'S BULLET. SOMETIME TODAY, IN SOME CITY IN AMERICA, A GUN SHOT WILL RING OUT AND SOMEONE ELSE WILL FALL DEAD OR WOUNDED. THE VICTIM MAY BE A PUBLIC LEADER OR A PRIVATE CITIZEN, BUT, WHOEVER HE IS AND WHEREVER HE FALLS, HE IS NOT ONLY THE VICTIM OF THE GUNMAN....HE IS THE VICTIM OF INDIFFERENCE. THE TRAGEDY IS STARK AND REAL. THE SCARS LAST FOREVER, AND THE ULTIMATE AND SENSELESS HORROR IS THAT SO MUCH OF THIS SLAUGHTER COULD BE PREVENTED. OUR GUN CONTROL LAWS ARE SO LAX THAT ANYONE CAN BUY A WEAPON....THE MENTALLY ILL, THE CRIMINAL, THE BOY TOO YOUNG TO BEAR THE RESPONSIBILITY OF OWNING A DEADLY WEAPON.
THE SOUND OF THAT GUNFIRE WILL ECHO AGAIN...TOMARROW, THE DAY AFTER, AND ALL THE DAYS TO FOLLOW, UNLESS WE ACT!!! 6,300 PEOPLE ARE MURDERED EVERY YEAR WITH FIRE- ARMS IN THESE UNITED STATES. THIS IS AN OUTRAGE AND WHEN IT IS COMPARED WITH THE FAR, FAR LOWER RATES IN OTHER FREE COUNTRIES, IT IS INTOLERABLE.
LIKE MOST AMERICANS, WE SHARE THE CONVICTION THAT STRONGER GUN CONTROL LEGISLATION IS MANDATORY IN THIS TRAGIC SITUATION. WE DO NOT SPEAK FROM IGNORENCE OF FIREARMS. THE FIVE OF US COUNT OURSELVES AMONG THE MILLIONS OF AMERICANS WHO RESPECT THE PRIVILEGE OF OWNING GUNS AS SPORTSMEN OR AS PRIVATE COLLECTORS. WE HAVE USED GUNS ALL OUR LIVES BUT THE PROPER USE OF GUNS IN PRIVATE HANDS IS NOT TO KILL PEOPLE.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE CONGRESS HAS RECENTLY GIVEN US SOME PROTECTION AGAINST PISTOLS IN THE WRONG HANDS. BUT THAT'S NOT ENOUGH....NOT NEARLY ENOUGH, THE CARNAGE WILL NOT STOP UNTIL THERE IS EFFECTIVE CONTROL OVER THE SALE OF RIFLES AND SHOTGUNS.
PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY WAS MURDERED BY A RIFLE. MARTIN LUTHER KING WAS MURDERED BY A RIFLE. MEDGAR EVERS WAS MURDERED BY A RIFLE.
NOT LONG AGO, A DEMENTED SNIPER PERCHED ON A TOWER AND KILLED FOURTEEN PEOPLE IN COLD BLOOD......BY RIFLE. FOR MANY LONG MONTHS, THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES HAS ASKED THE CONGRESS TO PASS SUCH A LAW... BUT THE CONGRESS WILL NOT LISTEN UNLESS YOU, THE VOTER, SPEAKS OUT....UNLESS THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY RISE UP AND DEMAND THAT THE CONGRESS GIVE US A STRONG AND EFFECTIVE GUN CONTROL LAW.
THE LEGISLATION HAS BEEN INTRODUCED. IN THE SENATE, IT IS S-3633. IN THE HOUSE IT IS HR-)7735.
THIS BILL IS NO MYSTERY. LET'S BE CLEAR ABOUT IT. IT'S PURPOSE IS SIMPLE AND DIRECT. IT IS NOT TO DEPRIVE THE SPORTSMAN OF HIS HUNTING GUN, THE MARKSMAN OF HIS TARGET RIFLE, NOR WOULD IT DENY TO ANY RESPONSIBLE CITIZEN HIS CONSTI- TUTIONAL RIGHT TO OWN A FIREARM. IT IS TO PREVENT THE MURDER OF AMERICANS. IT CONTAINS THREE SENSIBLE AND REALISTIC RULES.
FIRST, IT WILL OUTLAW THE MAIL ORDER SALES OF SHOTGUNS AND RIFLES. IF THIS LAW WERE IN FORCE SEVERAL YEARS AGO, IT MIGHT HAVE STOPPED LEE HARVEY OSWALD FROM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BUYING THE HIGH-POWERED RIFLE HE USED TO MURDER PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY. EACH YEAR ONE MILLION RIFLES ARE SOLD THROUGH THE MAILS.
SECOND, IT WILL OUTLAW SALES OF SHOTGUNS AND RIFLES TO MINORS - PEOPLE TOO YOUNG TO BEAR THE GRAVE RESPONSIBILITY PLACED IN THE HANDS OF A GUN OWNER.
THIRD, IT WILL OUTLAW SALES OF SHOTGUNS AND RIFLES TO STRANGERS. PEOPLE WHO DRIFT ACROSS STATE LINES, TOO OFTEN WITHOUT CREDENTIALS, BUY THESE WEAPONS, AS EASILY AS THEY BUY CIGARETTES AND CANDY. THE STATES WHICH HAVE STRONG GUN CONTROL LAWS WILL BE PROTECTED.
WE URGE YOU, AS A RESPONSIBLE, SENSIBLE AND CONCERNED CITIZEN, TO WRITE OR WIRE YOUR SENATOR AND CONGRESSMAN IMMEDIATELY AND DEMAND THEY SUPPORT THESE BILLS. IN THE SENATE, IT IS BILL S-3633. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, IT IS BILL HR-17735.
IN THE NAME OF HUMANITY....IN THE NAME OF CONSCIENCE....FOR THE COMMON SAFETY OF US ALL.... FOR THE FUTURE OF AMERICA, WE MUST ACT....IT IS UP TO YOU....YOU ALONE AND THE TIME IS NOW.
That being said, it would have done nothing to stop Lee Harvey Oswald, Charles Whitman, Sirhan-Sirhan or James Earl Ray.
Should one also have to prove he is a "responsible law abiding adult citizen" before being allowed to speak, worship, assemble, remain silent, be free from unreasonable searches, or from cruel and unusual punishements?
That being said, it would have done nothing to stop Lee Harvey Oswald, Charles Whitman, Sirhan-Sirhan or James Earl Ray.
If you admit such laws won't stop these sorts of things, then what is it you are attempting to accomplish by supporting them anyway?
If the government dealt with serious law breakers to start with, they wouldn't be buying guns since they'd all be hanging from ropes or busting rocks.
This is a classic case of the Hegelian Dialectic at work. Problem, reaction, solution. The gov't creates (through action or inaction) a problem, manipulates the public reaction, and finally proposes a solution which involves more government and higher taxes. Not only this, but their "solution" leads to another "problem", starting the cycle again.
The Constitutional issue is known as "prior restraint" alternatively understood as "guilty until proven innocent" and is specifically prohibited by the Constitution.
History is littered with examples of government arbitrarily and capricously assuming guilt and acting on that presumed guilt with extreme prejudice.
One oft referenced example is, of course, the policies of the duly elected German Government toward various segments of their population such as Jews, Gypsies and other non Aryan people.
The possession of armament by the general population (including military weapons such as shoulder fired missiles and various explosives-grenades,land mines etc.) is intended as a check and a balance on the capability of a Government to wage war on its own population.
Hope this helps.
Best regards,
This language is suspect and prejudicial as well as inflammatory and inaccurate, in other words: propaganda.
PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY WAS MURDERED BY A rifleman. MARTIN LUTHER KING WAS MURDERED BY A rifleman. MEDGAR EVERS WAS MURDERED BY A rifleman.
Best regards,
Any rational, adult non-felon shall not have his or her right to keep and bear arms infringed in any manner.
Proving that you are the person you claim to be (with no record of the transaction required to kept on any file or computer) is not unreasonable.
Will it do much good?
I doubt it.
About a month before Whitman's Texas Tower adventure, Richard Speck strangled 8 nurses in Chicago.
But neither do I see it doing any harm.
If you have a convincing arguement otherwise, or can show a violation of the 2nd Amendment, I'm all ears.
Very well said, but after reading it a second time I think this statement could be modernized/improved as follows:
This is a classic case of the Democratic Party at work. Problem, reaction, solution. The gov't creates (through action or inaction) a problem, manipulates the public reaction, and finally proposes a solution which involves more government and higher taxes. Not only this, but their "solution" leads to another "problem", starting the cycle again.
I agree with that.
I will research "Prior Restraint" but I would think the Founders meant that you must be of, at least, "militia" age. I would also think that being neither crazy nor criminal could be assumed.
This was the law of the land prior to 1968; the country somehow managed to survive nearly 200 years with this policy. If anyone should have a say, it's the parents who have the legal responsibility for their own children.
Should an Amazon.com computer ship out an order for a high-powered rifle to any address?
Again this was the law of the land prior to 1968. How could we have possibly made it this far?
Any rational, adult non-felon shall not have his or her right to keep and bear arms infringed in any manner.
Having to prove that oneself is not a criminal is an infringement ... you didn't answer my questions but instead are asking me some of your own. Should people have to prove who they are to worship or speak freely?
Proving that you are the person you claim to be (with no record of the transaction required to kept on any file or computer) is not unreasonable.
Well that's nice, though I disagree, but it certainly isn't what we have now: the "background check" includes make, model, and serial numbers of guns purchased - full blown registration.
Will it do much good? I doubt it.
I ask again: then why do you support it?
About a month before Whitman's Texas Tower adventure, Richard Speck strangled 8 nurses in Chicago.
S#it happens. Good thing the police were able to solicit the assistance of deer hunters to pin the guy down while they rushed him, no? Even if they hadn't, gun control wouldn't have stopped this guy, as you yourself admit. So why support it?
But neither do I see it doing any harm.
I do, it's a privacy violation. Why should I have to prove who I am, because the government releases people into society, to live among us, that it does not trust with guns?
If you have a convincing arguement otherwise,
I don't need one, you yourself admit the laws don't do work.
or can show a violation of the 2nd Amendment, I'm all ears.
If you were to look up "right" "people" "not" and "infringed" you could probably figure out the violations all by yourself. But knowing that violations occur is a far cry from having a court rule a law unconstitutional. I presume this is what you actually mean when asking me to "show" a violation. They're there, they're just not recognized (yet).
The corruption has overtaken both parties.
Those few in the Republican party calling for a real reduction in government and taxes and now referred to as the "fringe" element of the party.
You stated "The corruption has overtaken both parties", which is quite correct IMO.
One can only hope that the "Peter Principle" in politics has not grown so far as to justify the cleaning of the muskets.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.